Logical Tools for Handling Change in Agent-Based Systems

Gabbay, Dov M.; Schlechta, Karl

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04407-6

Cited by 10 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the material of this chapter (unless marked as "new") was published previously; see [Sch04], [GS08b], [GS08c], [GS09a], and [GS08f]. In addition, we also want to put our work a bit more in perspective, and make it self-contained, for the convenience of the reader.…”

Section: Basic Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We then go into details in the section on IBRS, introduced by D. Gabbay (see [Gab04]) and further investigated in [GS08b] and [GS08f], as they are not so much common knowledge. We then go into details in the section on IBRS, introduced by D. Gabbay (see [Gab04]) and further investigated in [GS08b] and [GS08f], as they are not so much common knowledge.…”

Section: Basic Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inheritance systems, (see, e.g., [TH89,THT86,THT87,TTH91,Tou86,Sch93,Sch97,GS08e], and [GS08f]) present many aspects of independence (see Section 3.3.7 (page 97)). Thus, if two nodes are not connected by valid paths, they may have very different languages, as language elements have to be inherited; otherwise, they are undefined.…”

Section: Additional Structure On Language and Truth Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We mostly consider symmetrical distances, so d.a; b/ D d.b; a/; and we work with equivalence classes OEa; b: Unfortunately, one of the main tools in [LMS01], a loop condition, does not work any more; it is too close to rankedness. This problem is one of principles: we showed in [GS08a] (see also [GS08f]) that Cumulativity suffices only to guarantee smoothness of the structure if the domain is closed under finite unions. Unfortunately, revision does not allow many observations (see [LMS01], and, in particular, the impossibility results for revision ("Hamster Wheels") discussed in [Sch04]), so all we have (see Section 3.4.3.3 (page 103)) are results which use more conditions than what can be observed from revision observations.…”

Section: Representation For General Revision Update and Counterfactmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Conditionals and Modularity in General Logics

Gabbay¹,

Schlechta²

2011

Cognitive Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Basic Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Basic Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Additional Structure On Language and Truth Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Representation For General Revision Update and Counterfactmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conditionals and Modularity in General Logics

Gabbay¹,

Schlechta²

2011

Cognitive Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Unsurprisingly, it is a popular metric in the literature on belief-and knowledge-base revision (Papini (2000)), or agent-based systems (Gabbay and Schlechta (2009)). In modal logic, it is one of the staple options to calculate the distance between possible worlds:…”

Section: The Edit Distance As a Modal Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information, possible worlds and the cooptation of scepticism

Floridi

2010

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article investigates the sceptical challenge from an information-theoretic perspective. Its main goal is to articulate and defend the view that either informational scepticism is radical, but then it is epistemologically innocuous because redundant; or it is moderate, but then epistemologically beneficial because useful. In order to pursue this cooptation strategy, the article is divided into seven sections. Section one sets up the problem. Section two introduces Borel numbers as a convenient way to refer uniformly to (the data that individuate) different possible worlds. Section three adopts the Hamming distance between Borel numbers as a metric to calculate the distance between possible worlds. In sections four and five, radical and moderate informational scepticism are analysed using Borel numbers and Hamming distances, and shown to be either harmless (extreme form) or actually fruitful (moderate form). Section six further clarifies the approach by replying to some potential objections. In the conclusion, the Peircean nature of the overall approach is briefly discussed.

show abstract